Reviews for Wikiwand - knowledge, with context
Wikiwand - knowledge, with context by Wikiwand
Review by somna
Rated 3 out of 5
by somna, 4 years agoI don't think this is for me - it's so unlike Wikipedia. I did start to appreciate it after trying it for some time (I especially like the nav bar on the left), but I also encountered quite a lot of issues, so I think I'll stick to regular Wikipedia in the meantime.
- Infoboxes look terrible. Images are off-center and the infobox is too close to the body of the article.
- Tables are sometimes split up when they have multiple headers.
- I also think content in tables needs more horizontal padding.
Dark mode certainly needs more work.
- Some elements still have a light background and the light text on it is difficult to see.
- Links in dark mode are gray, which is absurd.
- The text is a bit too bright for me. Either a lighter background or darker text would be easier on the eyes.
- Page previews disappear too slowly when my cursor moves away from it. Waiting for one to go away gets annoying when I'm trying to read the article content.
- The font looks horrid when both italicized and bold.
I understand that some of these issues might be caused by Wikipedia's own architecture, but I'm opting out regardless.
- Infoboxes look terrible. Images are off-center and the infobox is too close to the body of the article.
- Tables are sometimes split up when they have multiple headers.
- I also think content in tables needs more horizontal padding.
Dark mode certainly needs more work.
- Some elements still have a light background and the light text on it is difficult to see.
- Links in dark mode are gray, which is absurd.
- The text is a bit too bright for me. Either a lighter background or darker text would be easier on the eyes.
- Page previews disappear too slowly when my cursor moves away from it. Waiting for one to go away gets annoying when I'm trying to read the article content.
- The font looks horrid when both italicized and bold.
I understand that some of these issues might be caused by Wikipedia's own architecture, but I'm opting out regardless.
671 reviews
- Rated 1 out of 5by Haltarys, a month agoThe extension used to be good but now they're pushing users to subscribe, don't follow dark mode by default anymore (it resets every couple of days or so), and push the AI tab too much.
(And apparently, it has way too much ads, which I don't see because I use an ad blocker anyway) - Rated 1 out of 5by Firefox user 19053100, a month agoUsed to be really good, now it's infested with ads (ON A WIKIPEDIA SKIN, a notably ad free site) and AI bullshit everywhere, asking for a subscription. It also automatically blocks access to actual wikipedia, by automatically rerouting every article to their skin of it. No even entering the wikipedia website manually can you there with this extension installed. Where can i just get this extension, but how it was 2 or 3 years ago?
- Rated 5 out of 5by Firefox user 19114790, 3 months ago
- Rated 1 out of 5by Sciky, 3 months agoThis used to be a great extension, but now it's a bloatware full of ads for its AI, what a shame
- Rated 1 out of 5by Indiana Moon, 4 months agoIt does not "enhance user experience" as stated in the add-on description section. It was good once.
Enshittification! - Rated 2 out of 5by Firefox user 19063414, 4 months agoWikiwand was great, but now it's infested with AI popups, ads and the constant bugging to make an account. A shame because it used to be a great tool, now it's more work to click all the nonsense away.
- Rated 5 out of 5by Wamida, 4 months ago
- Rated 5 out of 5by carl, 4 months ago
- Rated 1 out of 5by Firefox user 14503325, 4 months ago
- Rated 1 out of 5by Firefox user 19040033, 4 months agoUsed to be a great addon but now totally destroyed by the Ads and AI
- Rated 5 out of 5by Firefox user 14706773, 4 months ago
- Rated 1 out of 5by Ally Simy, 4 months ago
- Rated 1 out of 5by Firefox user 19035698, 4 months agoEnshittification everywhere. Was a very nice plugin to cleanly read wikipedia, now cluttered with AI and ads
- Rated 1 out of 5by LCM, 4 months agoThey had the nerve to actually BLOCK people from accessing entire wikipedia pages. You are required to watch an ad before you can access the page. This is allegedly to have access to their "wikicontent," which is not needed or desired. This app used to be good. But pulling this crap was a step too far. You CANNOT BLOCK ACCESS TO WIKIPEDIA TO MAKE MONEY FROM ADS.
- Rated 5 out of 5by Firefox user 17979558, 5 months ago
- Rated 1 out of 5by Milan Regec, 5 months agoAll it does now is infest your Wikipedia with ads. Don't bother installing and I highly recommend uninstalling it if you already did so. Even when uninstalled, it keeps coming back and keeps stealing all Wikipedia links.
- Rated 1 out of 5by Firefox user 18996590, 5 months ago
- Rated 1 out of 5by Toccetness, 5 months agoAd-required, AI-driven slop. Went from premiere readability to money-driven corporation. Do not install.
- Rated 1 out of 5by Firefox user 17669402, 5 months agoAs many other reviews say. initially a good idea, now, full of AI slop i don't want.
- Rated 5 out of 5by marii, 5 months ago